Date: Mar 13, 2013 3:09 PM Author: Zaljohar@gmail.com Subject: Re: Reducing Incomparability in Cardinal comparisons On Mar 12, 10:46 pm, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 12, 2:49 pm, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > On Mar 11, 11:17 pm, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

> > > Let x-inj->y stands for there exist an injection from x to y and there

> > > do not exist a bijection between them; while x<-bij-> means there

> > > exist a bijection between x and y.

>

> > > Define: |x|=|y| iff x<-bij->y

>

> > > Define: |x| < |y| iff x-inj->y Or Rank(|x|) -inj-> Rank(|y|)

>

> > > Define: |x| > |y| iff |y| < |x|

>

> > > Define: |x| incomparable to |y| iff ~|x|=|y| & ~|x|<|y| & ~|x|>|y|

>

> > > where |x| is defined after Scott's.

>

> > > Now those are definitions of what I call "complex size comparisons",

> > > they are MORE discriminatory than the ordinary notions of cardinal

> > > comparisons. Actually it is provable in ZF that for each set x there

> > > exist a *set* of all cardinals that are INCOMPARABLE to |x|. This of

> > > course reduces incomparability between cardinals from being of a

> > > proper class size in some models of ZF to only set sized classes in

> > > ALL models of ZF.

>

> > > However the relation is not that natural at all.

>

> > > Zuhair

>

> > One can also use this relation to define cardinals in ZF.

>

> > |x|={y| for all z in TC({y}). z <* x}

>

> > Of course <* can be defined as:

>

> > x <* y iff [x -inj->y Or

> > Exist x*. x*<-bij->x & for all y*. y*<-bij->y -> rank(x*) in

> > rank(y*)].

>

> > Zuhair

>

> All the above I'm sure of, but the following I'm not really sure of:

>

> Perhaps we can vanquish incomparability altogether

>

> If we prove that for all x there exist H(x) defined as the set of all

> sets hereditarily not strictly supernumerous to x. Where strict

> subnumerousity is the converse of relation <* defined above.

>

> Then perhpas we can define a new Equinumerousity relation as:

>

> x Equinumerous to y iff H(x) bijective to H(y)

>

> Also a new subnumerousity relation may be defined as:

>

> x Subnumerous* to y iff H(x) injective to H(y)

Better would be

x Subnumerous* to y iff H(x) <* H(y)

however still this won't concur incomparability completely

However if we define recursively H_n(x) then we can define

the above relations after those. However still incomparability

would persist, although the above is still a strong approach

against incomparability.

>

> This might resolve all incomparability issues (I very highly doubt

> it).

>

> Then the Cardinality of a set would be defined as the set of all sets

> Equinumerous to it of the least possible rank.

>

> A Scott like definition, yet not Scott's.

>

> Zuhair